What do you think?

[ArtK78]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skj7652ha864dckq9]133|100|Scoring: XIMP

1♠ - (P) - 2♥ - (P)

?[/hv]

 

You are playing a method where your opening 1♠ bid at this vulnerability promises 10 or more HCP. Partner's 2♥ bid is not game forcing. Systemically, these are your options over 2♥:

 

2♠ - mark time bid - does not say anything - partner will describe his hand

2NT - artificial game force - you will tell partner what type of hand you have on the next round.

3 of a minor - natural, game forcing.

3♥ - natural, invitational

3♠ - natural, invitational

3NT - to play

4 of a minor - splinter

4♥ - to play

4♠ - to play

 

Note: Partner's 2/1 is not game forcing, but it does promise values. And he knows that you have promised only 10 HCP.

 

I chose another bid - 5♦ Exclusion RKCB (1430 responses). If partner has only one key card outside of diamonds, I would pass (he cannot have 4 key cards outside of diamonds). I deliberately dismissed the possibility of partner holding 0 key cards as unlikely - if that is the case, we are getting to a slam off two cashing aces and the trump king. While the 5♦ bid was somewhat risky, it seemed to me to be the best way to get to a grand when it is there and an easy way to get to a small most of the time.

 

Your thoughts?

[Gerben42]

It seems I must temporize with 2NT before showing my ♥ fit. I'm not strong enough for 4♦ which could be a bunch stronger...

[MFA]

4♦ splinter is fine. I don't like the exclusion idea. The spade suit is far from running yet, and where is the ♥Q? We will struggle in a bad 5♥ too often, while 4♦ rates to make partner do the right thing.

[helene_t]

4♦.

[Walddk]

4♦ splinter is fine. I don't like the exclusion idea. The spade suit is far from running yet, and where is the ♥Q? We will struggle in a bad 5♥ too often, while 4♦ rates to make partner do the right thing.

What he said. I am prepared to go to game, not necessarily to slam and especially not the dreaded 5-level. If partner signs off, a hand with only one ace has nothing more to add.

 

4♦ it is for me too.

 

Roland

[Finch]

4D, and pass 4H from partner, seems to describe my hand admirably.

[mcphee]

I think exclusion is bidding too much too quickly. 4D is perfect and makes the statement

that allows us to move along safe and sound. As Roland remarks, the 5 level is not my cup of tea (he's English).

[Codo]

Even if 4 ♦ looks like a underbid, this is it for me, for the reasons the Danes showed.

[keylime]

2NT, since I have the bid free to do so. I want to see how the spade secondary fit looks before making any educated slam tries. I'm probably giving up at 4H on this hand. I have no logical rationale for splintering here due to the spade length.

 

The problem with 4♦ is if pard is on 1-5-4-3 with Axxx of diamonds and no spade honor, they may get too high at the five level, even when holding the A♣.

[mike777]

4D, and pass 4H from partner, seems to describe my hand admirably.

ditto.

[Fluffy]

Better than direct 5♦ I prefer 4♦ and then 5♦ wich would show void slam invitational values.

[andy_h]

Is there another splinter available, via 2NT then 4D? If so, I presume it's a stronger sequence? Or maybe partner might not ask what we have after 2NT, so I will bid 4D now. Not 5D EKCB like the others have said.

[benlessard]

Well if you cannot show a void here might as well not play it. Considering you could have 10 pts your hand as enough extras to be at the 5 level. I assume partner 2 level bid show something like 12 pts so unless heavy wastage in D we should be safe at the 5 level.

 

To play 1S---2H----3H & 1S----2H-----3S as non-forcing in IMPS is something that doesnt make any sense.

[ArtK78]

To play 1S---2H----3H & 1S----2H-----3S as non-forcing in IMPS is something that doesnt make any sense.

Actually, it does in the context of the system.

 

This is a method that was shown to me by a friend of mine who played on one of the US Senior Teams that medalled at one of the Olympiads. I suggest that you give it a closer look.

 

The fact is that auctions that start 1♠ - 2♥ can be somewhat difficult to handle in Standard methods. This method gives you a lot of options.

[pclayton]

5♦ EKCB looks a little premature, but will pard really move over a splinter with a black ace and ♥KQ-5th (or ♥KJ-6th)?

 

I like 2N, but the continuations seem murky. If pard rebids 3♥, is 4♣ a cue bid? If pard rebids 3 minor and I show support for hearts, is pard compelled to cuebid?

[ArtK78]

5♦ EKCB looks a little premature, but will pard really move over a splinter with a black ace and ♥KQ-5th (or ♥KJ-6th)?

 

I like 2N, but the continuations seem murky. If pard rebids 3♥, is 4♣ a cue bid? If pard rebids 3 minor and I show support for hearts, is pard compelled to cuebid?

Since 3♣ over 2♥ is natural and game forcing, 2NT followed by 4♣ would be a cue bid.

 

Further, just like in any forcing auction, it is expected that when you announce a fit below the level of game that you are in a mandatory cue bidding situation. So, after opener's artificial 2NT game force followed by 3♥ showing a heart fit, responder should cue bid.

 

On the actual hand, if you choose to make a game forcing artificial 2NT bid, partner will bid 3NT. If you choose to bid 4♣ now, it will be a cue bid, but it could be in support of hearts or spades - that has not been clarified.

[pclayton]

Further, just like in any forcing auction, it is expected that when you announce a fit below the level of game that you are in a mandatory cue bidding situation. So, after opener's artificial 2NT game force followed by 3♥ showing a heart fit, responder should cue bid.

This is a reasonable approach, but IMO it doesn't function well without serious / non-serious 3N. I will try 4♣.

 

On the actual hand, if you choose to make a game forcing artificial 2NT bid, partner will bid 3NT. If you choose to bid 4♣ now, it will be a cue bid, but it could be in support of hearts or spades - that has not been clarified.

 

Ugh. Why wouldn't there be some sort of stall over 2N so that I can clarify my hand type? Apparently I have GF in either hearts or spades. Wouldn't it make sense to have some sort of inversion here? One idea: 3♣ = I was about to bid 3N. 3♦/3♥/3♠ = natural, 3N = clubs.

 

So what does he does over 4♣? No diamond cue is good news...

[bhall]

The structure after 2N (artificial game force) is crucial here. Presumably, you were playing that responder's rebids of 3♥, 3♠, and 3N were simple, natural choice-of-game bids. Probably, 3m showed a high card in the minor, not necessarily 4+ cards. And the 2N rebid itself denied a biddable minor.

 

If that's the case, then 2N becomes a standout choice. It gives responder a chance to show a ♦ high card, over which you can jump to 4♥, or a ♣ high card, over which you can jump to 4♦. If he rebids 3♥, then 4♣ should be a cue in support, and you can subside over his 4♦ or cue 5♦ over his 4♥. Similarly, if he rebids 3♠ or 3N.

[miguelm]

I don't know the structure after 2NT, but unless I can anticipate problems by going in that direction that is what I am bidding.... 4D (splinter) is my second choice.

[ArtK78]

Here is what happened at the table:

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sathjt753dkj8cat3&w=s94hkq92dq7653c84&e=sq83hdat942cj7652&s=skj7652ha864dckq9]399|300|Scoring: XIMP

1♠ - (P) - 2♥ - (P)

5♦* - X - 5♥* - (P)

6♥ - X - All Pass[/hv]

 

I bid 5♦ exclusion RKCB, and my LHO doubled on Qxxxx of diamonds (brilliant). My pard bid 5♥, a ROPI response showing 2 key cards outside of diamonds without the trump queen. I thought the slam should have reasonable play and bid it. My LHO disagreed with me, and this time he was right.

 

6♥ is a reasonable contract, but, obviously, fails miserably when hearts are 4-0 offside. Thanks to the "lead directing" double of 5♦, the opening lead was the ♦A. That left little to the play, and 6♥x was down only one trick.

 

Many of you disagree with the 5♦ bid, calling it precipitous, or just too much. I am not convinced, although I agree that the bid has its flaws. Here, it led to a very reasonable slam, which can be bid by other means, although someone will have to take a rosy view of the hand at some point in the auction - probably my hand. Still, if you are going to be aggressive on my hand in any event, why not bid 5♦ over 2♥?

[jdonn]

Still, if you are going to be aggressive on my hand in any event, why not bid 5♦ over 2♥?

It's one thing to be in slam on these cards, where at least there is a huge upside when hearts behave. But it's quite another to force yourself to be in 5 when partner's spade ace is the queen, increasing your risk dramatically with no extra reward at all.

[pclayton]

Here is what happened at the table:

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sathjt753dkj8cat3&w=s94hkq92dq7653c84&e=sq83hdat942cj7652&s=skj7652ha864dckq9]399|300|Scoring: XIMP

1♠ - (P) - 2♥ - (P)

5♦* - X - 5♥* - (P)

6♥ - X - All Pass[/hv]

 

I bid 5♦ exclusion RKCB, and my LHO doubled on Qxxxx of diamonds (brilliant). My pard bid 5♥, a ROPI response showing 2 key cards outside of diamonds without the trump queen. I thought the slam should have reasonable play and bid it. My LHO disagreed with me, and this time he was right.

 

6♥ is a reasonable contract, but, obviously, fails miserably when hearts are 4-0 offside. Thanks to the "lead directing" double of 5♦, the opening lead was the ♦A. That left little to the play, and 6♥x was down only one trick.

 

Many of you disagree with the 5♦ bid, calling it precipitous, or just too much. I am not convinced, although I agree that the bid has its flaws. Here, it led to a very reasonable slam, which can be bid by other means, although someone will have to take a rosy view of the hand at some point in the auction - probably my hand. Still, if you are going to be aggressive on my hand in any event, why not bid 5♦ over 2♥?

Slam is OK. It would be better with the ♥9 (or a 6th heart) of course, but who can find

out that?

 

Why not this (with my suggested switch and a little non-serious sprinkled in):

 

1♠ - 2♥

2N - 3♣

3♥ - 3♠

3N - 4♣

5♦ (x) - 5♥

6♥

 

3♣ = I was going to bid 3N

3♠ = (artificial) I have a relative minimum

3N = Spade cue - Normally 2 of the top 3 spades, but I think the KJ will do.

4♣ = A or K

 

That should be enough encouragement. Now I think you can blast....

[ArtK78]

Still, if you are going to be aggressive on my hand in any event, why not bid 5♦ over 2♥?

It's one thing to be in slam on these cards, where at least there is a huge upside when hearts behave. But it's quite another to force yourself to be in 5 when partner's spade ace is the queen, increasing your risk dramatically with no extra reward at all.

A couple of thoughts about that.

 

First, I mentioned that we played a light opening system. Therefore, the minimum for a 2♥ response - even one that is not game forcing - is about a queen higher than standard. So, my partner's actual hand is about a dead minimum for a 2♥ call.

 

That doesn't mean that the 5 level is not dangerously high, but it does lessen the risk.

 

Second, I thought that using exclusion RKCB directly would greatly simplify grand slam exploration while also giving us a chance to stop short of a small slam if partner showed only one key card outside of diamonds. As shown by some of the posters, the auction can get extremely complicated if one takes the bidding slowly. There is something to be said for simplicity, even if it doesn't cater to every possibility.

[mike777]

[ArtK78]

Mike: Are you saying that you wouldn't want to be in 6♥ on these cards? In my opinion, despite the wasted diamond honors, 6♥ is a pretty good slam - well over 50%.